Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J
YOGENDER CHANDOLIA – Appellant
Versus
VISHESH RAVI – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. election petition basis and grounds (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments on educational qualification disclosure (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. framework of corrupt practices under rp act (Para 6 , 7 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. interpretation of section 123(4) of rp act (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. judicial intervention limits after elections (Para 11 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 6. non-disclosure implications and election mandates (Para 14 , 15 , 20) |
JUDGMENT
1. The present Petition under Section 80 read with Section 100(1)(b) & (d) of Representation of People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as “RP Act”), has been filed by the Petitioner seeking a declaration of the election of Returned Candidate / Respondent No.1 from the Assembly Constituency- 23, Karol Bagh (hereinafter referred to as “AC-23”), for the General Election, held in 2020 to the Legislative Assembly of NCT of Delhi, as null and void on the ground of false and mis-representative facts deposed in Affidavit / Form No.26 furnished by the Returned Candidate / Respondent No.1 alongwith his nomination paper, wherein, the Returned Candidate / Respondent No.1 not only deliberately furnished false averments but also concealed the material facts regarding educational
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
